Your Turn — Monday, May 13, 2013

Updated 10:00 pm, Sunday, May 12, 2013

Photo: Aaron M. Sprecher, Bloomberg

Image 1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

An NRA attendee looks through the scope of a Freedom Group Inc. Remington brand gun during the 2013 National Rifle Association Annual Meetings & Exhibits at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas, U.S., on Saturday, May 4, 2013. After the U.S. Senate defeated a proposed expansion of background checks on gun purchases, the NRA's annual conference has a celebratory atmosphere. Yet as the festivities began, gun-control advocates swarmed town halls, organizing petitions and buying local ads to pressure senators from Alaska to New Hampshire to reconsider the measure that failed by six votes on April 17. Photographer: Aaron M. Sprecher/Bloomberg less

An NRA attendee looks through the scope of a Freedom Group Inc. Remington brand gun during the 2013 National Rifle Association Annual Meetings & Exhibits at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, ... more

Photo: Aaron M. Sprecher, Bloomberg

Your Turn — Monday, May 13, 2013

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

Guns on campus

Re: “Time is running out for legislators,” Front Page, May 6:

Whether one is an advocate for or against legislation allowing gun storage (and handling) on Texas college campuses, it is a terrible idea for our state.

I am a retired college administrator who oversaw undergraduate admissions marketing, recruitment and selection programs for nearly 30 years. I discussed with countless parents their hopes — and fears — for their college-bound students. I know that their concern for the safety and security of their children on campus is greater than any other. Visions of mixing young people, alcohol and guns will frighten parents enough to send their children out of state to the promise of greater security.

It doesn't matter whether the perceived threat is real or not. Parents will not take the risk. The result will be a brain drain for Texas. Parents who can afford to send their children elsewhere will do that. If I were directing an admissions marketing program today at a non-Texas university, I would be developing an aggressive recruitment and scholarship campaign for Texas students — and gleefully anticipate this bone-headed move by the Texas Legislature.

Historically, Texas has been an importer of out-of-state students, not an exporter of its own. Those trends are likely to reverse if this proposed legislation is enacted.

The letter states that since car owners have to buy liability insurance, law-abiding gun owners should also buy liability insurance. The writer says “... it is safe to assume that gun owners without insurance would have sinister reasons for not being insured. And those people could have their guns taken away.”

The Texas DPS estimates that 25 percent of Texas drivers drive without liability insurance. Because of the risk they pose to those who do have insurance, it becomes necessary to protect ourselves by buying uninsured motorist insurance. If caught, an uninsured motorist can be fined up to $350 and penalized $250 a year for three years — a relatively small price compared to the cost of liability insurance.

Here's an idea: rather than asking all legal gun owners to ante up for liability insurance, how about if we let those who feel that they might be injured by a gun buy their own insurance? They have almost a zero chance of being shot by a legal gun owner, so they would be protecting themselves only from those with “sinister reasons.” I'm sure the writer's insurance agent would be glad to sell him such coverage.

And why does the writer assume that gun owners who wouldn't buy insurance could be identified so their guns could be taken away? I'd bet that almost every one of them would have unregistered guns, which they obtained without any kind of a background check.

Making gun liability insurance mandatory would do absolutely nothing to prevent gun crimes or accidents, any more than requiring auto liability insurance does. Only the law-abiding citizens would buy either, regardless of the penalties.

President Reagan fired the striking air traffic controllers. He replaced them with active-duty personnel, many from our bases in San Antonio. That ingenuity the letter writer refers to had substantial costs to our government. It in no way can compare to the sequesters this year.

I find it inexcusable that our leaders didn't do their jobs, and their fix is to punish government employees who do perform their jobs. The closing of control towers and the impact of the sequestering of FAA employees was all spelled out to Congress earlier this year by the Office of Management and Budget.

SMU political science professor Cal Jillson is quoted as saying, “Texas conservatives, in both the House and Senate, seem not to realize that you cannot both be the core of the opposition to administration programs and the frequent beneficiary of administration largesse.'”

There are three alarming implications of that statement:

(1) The federal government may reward states (partly with their own money) that support the administration, and punish those (by withholding their own money) that oppose the administration. This is government by bribery and extortion that is practiced by some Third World regimes.

(2) “Administration largesse” represents a concentration of centralized power that the founders sought to prevent by creating a federal system of shared sovereignty.

(3) Arbitrary rule by granting and denying political favors is acceptable, and, therefore a government of men, not laws, is acceptable.

I agree with the mayor of Bulverde about cyclists on the roadways. We have the same problem in San Antonio. My wife was driving home from shopping, and coming at her was a cyclist doing something with a cellphone while riding. My wife just pulled to the side of the road, and waited for the cyclist to go by.

We have to be careful of joggers also in the city. I just don't know why they have to jog on the streets, when they can go to any park or high school and use the running tracks. It sure would make it safer for everyone.